zDoom vs. jDoom?

[SunlapseVertigo]

I currently have a brand new computer and everything, i got jDoom installed and i'm loving it. Thing is, all I ever hear about is zDoom, and lots of good .wads are made for zDoom. I remember downloading zDoom a couple years ago and aside from being able to look up and down, i wasn't really too impressed. However, someone got me back into Doom sorta recently and told me about jDoom, i downloaded it and it has friggin blew me away, graphics, gameplay and everything. But what about zDoom? how far has it come nowadays? how would you guys compare it to jDoom graphically, gameplay wise, etc etc....

[Ichor]

The source ports I use are:

ZDoom
JHexen
Heretic (or no source port)

JDoom is nice, but all those models and other effects tend to slow everything down. The only time I use JDoom is when playing Doom 64. JHexen is an older version, which doesn't use models. And heretic.exe seems to work better than either port for my tastes.

[Draconio]

JDoom is better for fancy graphics.
ZDoom is better for just about anything else.

There's also a ZDoomGL that might give you the best of both worlds, but as I don't use that I can't comment.

[The Ultimate DooMer]

SunlapseVertigo said:

But what about zDoom? how far has it come nowadays? how would you guys compare it to jDoom graphically, gameplay wise, etc etc....

It's come a long, long way. I won't go into it too much, but it now has such things as slopes, underwater zones, infinite new scenery, pickup items and projectiles, and more recently an uncapped framerate and the ability to use any graphic on any wall/floor. The next version will allow the mapper to make infinite new monsters and weapons, too. Newest version here.

Graphically still inferior to jDoom, as it uses the software mode (an OpenGL version exists, but it's somewhat behind the software version in development) but gameplay wise I'd say it was better - vanilla bugs such as hitscan shots (bullets/shells/melee hits) going straight through the monsters and not being able to chainsaw/punch wider monsters have been fixed, god mode doesn't change your health (if you type 'god' at the console or bind a key to it) and you can jump (which can save a lot of time when backtracking, don't use it to shortcut though). Music changes (through scripting or the idmus cheat) are also preserved in savegames, which is a nice little touch.

Basically, it's like Draconio said: if you want cool graphics then jDoom is the way to go. For everything else except demo recording/watching, it's ZDoom - especially if you make maps. (ZDoom is weak on demo support)

[Psyrus]

JDoom is for people who enjoy eye-candy features provided by dynamic lighting and md2 models giving wads kind of a Quake-like look to them. ZDoom contains other features like colored lighting, scripted events, slopes, etc., but no md2 models and such with an exception to ZDoomGL. ZDoom tends to be the most frequently used source port especially to script writers. Doom Legacy is up there too somewhere.

[Sharessa]

ZDoom is very easy to work with to make cool stuff for level editors. That's why it's my favorite port.

[Epyo]

Play my wad now. See sig. It'll show you how far zdoom has come.

[boris]

The Ultimate DooMer said:

The next version will allow the mapper to make infinite new monsters and weapons, too.

Actually it's already possible to make new monsters in 63.

[Nemephosis]

OKay I can see ZDoom is good if you plan on making maps etc. but how about if you're just a player of the game? What does ZDoom have over JDoom if I plan on playing and not making stuff?

[DooMBoy]

ZDoom is all I ever use.

[Linguica]

Nemephosis said:

What does ZDoom have over JDoom if I plan on playing and not making stuff?

Well you can play ZDoom WADs I suppose

[Draconio]

Depends... if you just want to play the original levels, it's a matter of personal preference, some people like OpenGL effects while others prefer the classic look.

If you want to play add-on levels, ZDoom is a better choice because not only can it play levels made for ZDoom, it can also play levels designed with the Boom editing features. JDoom itself cannot play Boom levels, although Risen3D, an offshoot of JDoom, is capable of doing so. ZDoom maps function properly only under ZDoom.

[Nemephosis]

hmm. I could swear I've played ZDoom wads on JDoom already. I'm not 100% sure though. I've played Cyberdreams and Scythe on JDoom already, and Cyberdreams even said "use this launcher instead" and I didn't. Worked fine for me.

:shrug: I dunno. Jdoom works fine and I do like the better graphics. I was just sort of wondering why everyone liked ZDoom so much.

[Draconio]

Ummm, neither Cyberdreams nor Scythe are designed specifically for ZDoom as far as I know. They're not port-specific.

[Epyo]

Nemephosis said:

Jdoom works fine and I do like the better graphics.

Well that's your opinion. I think it looks excessively ugly.

[Relica Religia]

JDOOM has come a long way in helping rebuild the graphics of the game, whereas ZDOOM expands the programming capabilities of the original game.

It's a tossup, and I use both engines, thought it'd be fun if Jakko Keranen and Randy Heit could team up and merge the two. :D

[Grazza]

I only use Zdoom if a wad specifically requires it.

I don't use jDoom too often; there aren't a great deal of wads that are made for it. It would be my preference if a wad simply required "any port with jumping enabled".

[Remilia Scarlet]

I actually don't use anything but jDoom anymore. Mainly because I have a computer that can handle all the addon models, features, and such at 1600x1200x32 (monitor limit) and not slowdown. I used to use Legacy as well, but stopped after a few frustrations concerning odd errors when creating levels.

But I really use jDoom simply because I like the feel it has. I've rarely used ZDoom, so I really can't honestly comment on it, but I like jDoom because of its features, graphics, and the concepts it has with XG sectors and lines. I do wish, however, that jDoom had a few more editing features that are in ZDoom that I always hear about. But overall, they're both great ports.

[The Ultimate DooMer]

boris said:

Actually it's already possible to make new monsters in 63.

Yes, but given that you can't really do anything to the monsters without it crashing, it's effectively a 64 feature. (in terms of getting more than 20% of it's potential out of it)

[Intel17]

I play both source ports and when i want to use old WADS i use Doom 95 :)

[chilvence]

SunlapseVertigo said:

zDoom vs. jDoom?

zDoom + jDoom

[Stealthy Ivan]

ZDoom all day bitch... :P
I geuss I support it cause its the first good port I found.

[Naked Snake]

I pretty much just use ZDoom, but I use JDoom for Doom 64.

[Kaiser]

I like Zdoom primary for editing. Jdoom and that TC sucks.

[dr_st]

JDoom - a good port with a nice theme but a very resource-hogging one.
ZDoom - a crappy port with lots of "uber-kewl" features no one needs and an ugly interface.

[Lutrov71]

I use jDoom more often than ZDoom. My Zdoom has to be in 1024 by 768 or it stuffs up and the music has to be put down or else it becomes all muffled.

Meh, I use PRboom most the time anyway.

[LogicDeLuxe]

I use ZDoom for all the ZDoom specific wads. Eternity or PrBoom for the majority of the other mods.
I also like JDoom and Risen3D with the original levels and pwad's with the same complexity, but more details maps won't run on my old computer at a reasonable framerate. Well, it is ugly, unless you install models and hires textures (not to be confused with detail textures)
Unfortunately, I discovered some annoying bugs in Risen3D regarding savegame usage mainly.

[Amaster]

I dont dislike JDoom, but I rarely use it since there are almost no maps that require it.

[Graf Zahl]

dr_st said:

ZDoom - a crappy port with lots of "uber-kewl" features no one needs and an ugly interface.

Features no one needs? YOU may not need them but in contrast to JDoom's features they are actually used by mappers! WADs like Team TNT's Daedalus wouldn't be possible without them. So your statement is incorrect by default.

So how if I'd say , it's not my real opinion!):

JDoom, a crappy port which emphasizes eye candy no one needs over real editing features. All it can do is play stock Doom WADs with better graphics. Why bother?



So which one is really better? It can't be answered because the goals of these two source ports are completely different. JDoom's only goal appears to be to play Doom with better graphics. Even though it does have some special features they are so rarely used that they hardly count but the Doom64 TC clearly shows what is possible (but it also shows where the limits are.)
ZDoom's main focus, on the other hand are editing features (and it's not surprising that many were suggested by the mapping community.) Graphics improvements are not a factor here.

So it comes down to this:

If you absolutely need cool graphics with a high eye candy factor JDoom is the way to go (though I recommend Risen3D because it is Boom compatible and can play a lot more maps than JDoom.)

If you want to play maps with great ideas you have to use ZDoom because apparently every mapper who wants to do more than the standard Doom stuff uses it.

[icemann]

JDoom is best for fancy looking TCs like Doom64 or just for fancy Dooming. Otherwise zdoom is best.